|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Aug 30, 2010 6:16:15 GMT -8
Non Presidential election year the party out of power almost always improves their position. It is a good thing and is sought after.
Our two party system needs a fickle electorate to keep the masses placated. Remember we are trying to convince ourselves that we are a Democracy. We are not really a Democracy. This country is run by the moneyed elite. It has been that way since the Early 1800's. The Civil War was pursued by the Republicans (Lincoln et al) because the Industrial North needed the Agricultural South to be providers of raw product and consumers of finished product. That was the financial reason for fighting the war to prevent the southern states from forming their own country.
The people with the money buy the rules, regulations and laws in this country. That is our present reality. It will not change even if the Republicans disappear or win it all.
|
|
|
|
Post by William L. Rupp on Aug 30, 2010 10:54:23 GMT -8
My predictions:
GOP picks up 43 in the House and 6 in the Senate. The Republicans will therefore control the House and have more than enough seats in the Senate to stall anything like ObamaCare.
Obama will have two alternatives. He can (A) seriously try to work with the Republicans in the House and fulfill his promise of post partisanship, or (B) encourage the Senate Democrats to hang tough with big government initiatives. He will pick the latter and claim in 2012 that he was thwarted by those rascally Republicans. That will be his strategy in 2012; "Re-elect me and vote for Democrats in the Congress so we can finish the job. And don't forget how charismatic I am!"
If the economy is noticeably better (GDP growth of 4% or more and unemployment down to below 8%) and the Republicans pick a weak candidate (so far I don't see a really strong one), Obama will win. If the economy is still pretty bad (not out of the question if we are in a 5-10 year period of near depression) and the GOP's candidate catches fire, then Obama may lose, but if so it will be a close loss.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Aug 31, 2010 15:48:31 GMT -8
My predictions: GOP picks up 43 in the House and 6 in the Senate. The Republicans will therefore control the House and have more than enough seats in the Senate to stall anything like ObamaCare. Obama will have two alternatives. He can (A) seriously try to work with the Republicans in the House and fulfill his promise of post partisanship, or (B) encourage the Senate Democrats to hang tough with big government initiatives. He will pick the latter and claim in 2012 that he was thwarted by those rascally Republicans. That will be his strategy in 2012; " Re-elect me and vote for Democrats in the Congress so we can finish the job. And don't forget how charismatic I am!" If the economy is noticeably better (GDP growth of 4% or more and unemployment down to below 8%) and the Republicans pick a weak candidate (so far I don't see a really strong one), Obama will win. If the economy is still pretty bad (not out of the question if we are in a 5-10 year period of near depression) and the GOP's candidate catches fire, then Obama may lose, but if so it will be a close loss. AzWm I voted for Obama reluctantly, because I did not buy the cooperation with the Republicans meme he was selling. I wanted Hillary and a real battle. As it turns out the battle would have been better as Obama has alienated his base without gaining one iota of cooperation from the right. That is true even though the consensus remains that the Republicans caused the wars and the economic mess. The only thing Republicans understand is raw power. The have no interest on governance or cooperation-none. If Obama cooperates with Republicans one iota more than they cooperated with him, I will support a primary challenger. I will buy nothing any Republican offers, including our perennial Realtor, Rossi. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 31, 2010 17:39:44 GMT -8
My predictions: GOP picks up 43 in the House and 6 in the Senate. The Republicans will therefore control the House and have more than enough seats in the Senate to stall anything like ObamaCare. Obama will have two alternatives. He can (A) seriously try to work with the Republicans in the House and fulfill his promise of post partisanship, or (B) encourage the Senate Democrats to hang tough with big government initiatives. He will pick the latter and claim in 2012 that he was thwarted by those rascally Republicans. That will be his strategy in 2012; " Re-elect me and vote for Democrats in the Congress so we can finish the job. And don't forget how charismatic I am!" If the economy is noticeably better (GDP growth of 4% or more and unemployment down to below 8%) and the Republicans pick a weak candidate (so far I don't see a really strong one), Obama will win. If the economy is still pretty bad (not out of the question if we are in a 5-10 year period of near depression) and the GOP's candidate catches fire, then Obama may lose, but if so it will be a close loss. AzWm I voted for Obama reluctantly, because I did not buy the cooperation with the Republicans meme he was selling. I wanted Hillary and a real battle. As it turns out the battle would have been better as Obama has alienated his base without gaining one iota of cooperation from the right. That is true even though the consensus remains that the Republicans caused the wars and the economic mess. The only thing Republicans understand is raw power. The have no interest on governance or cooperation-none. If Obama cooperates with Republicans one iota more than they cooperated with him, I will support a primary challenger. I will buy nothing any Republican offers, including our perennial Realtor, Rossi. I see where Dino is polling ahead of Patty. Is that true? Is that one of the seats that dems will lose? |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Sept 5, 2010 15:54:45 GMT -8
I voted for Obama reluctantly, because I did not buy the cooperation with the Republicans meme he was selling. I wanted Hillary and a real battle. As it turns out the battle would have been better as Obama has alienated his base without gaining one iota of cooperation from the right. That is true even though the consensus remains that the Republicans caused the wars and the economic mess. The only thing Republicans understand is raw power. The have no interest on governance or cooperation-none. If Obama cooperates with Republicans one iota more than they cooperated with him, I will support a primary challenger. I will buy nothing any Republican offers, including our perennial Realtor, Rossi. I see where Dino is polling ahead of Patty. Is that true? Is that one of the seats that dems will lose? I have not read that. Murray has a slight lead. Rossi is a fool. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 5, 2010 19:00:31 GMT -8
The only thing Republicans understand is raw power. The have no interest on governance or cooperation-none. One consistent thing about Republicans. They have never known a war that they did not fund. to stop them from destroying the world, we need to do away with the military. Don't worry, Mexico will never invade us. The last thing they would ever want is to have to deal with all of the NRA members who would be shooting at them. Then their worse fear might be realized and that would be that the American men might turn the American Women on the Mexicans. American Woman Stay away from ME! |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 5, 2010 19:08:31 GMT -8
I see where Dino is polling ahead of Patty. Is that true? Is that one of the seats that dems will lose? I have not read that. Murray has a slight lead. Rossi is a fool. Three out of four polls have Dino in the lead. If he wins will he still be a fool? I guess he will. He had no clue how to keep the Dems in King County from "finding" new ballots and losing military absentee ballots to lose the Gov race. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Sept 6, 2010 13:30:18 GMT -8
I have not read that. Murray has a slight lead. Rossi is a fool. Three out of four polls have Dino in the lead. If he wins will he still be a fool? I guess he will. He had no clue how to keep the Dems in King County from "finding" new ballots and losing military absentee ballots to lose the Gov race. At the risk of stuttering, I have not read that at all. And I keep up with it. I am glad that as a former Washingtonian you try to keep up, but it is, in its essence, purely academic to you. I would have to live with him and I don't like local Republicans. Our favorite real[it]tor has lost twice before and unless Idaho moves west, he will lose, again. And then the childish whining will begin. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 6, 2010 15:49:31 GMT -8
Three out of four polls have Dino in the lead. If he wins will he still be a fool? I guess he will. He had no clue how to keep the Dems in King County from "finding" new ballots and losing military absentee ballots to lose the Gov race. At the risk of stuttering, I have not read that at all. And I keep up with it. I am glad that as a former Washingtonian you try to keep up, but it is, in its essence, purely academic to you. I would have to live with him and I don't like local Republicans. Our favorite real[it]tor has lost twice before and unless Idaho moves west, he will lose, again. And then the childish whining will begin. I guess we will see. King County has a way of digging up votes that is hard to counter. I did Google and found those four polls with Dino winning three of them. |
|
